ISTps and relationships

[jessica129]

I'm going to go ahead and bump this, another topic isn't necessary.

So as much as I swore off dating for awhile, I met this guy the other day who I'm quite interested in. That vow didn't last long! haha. I'm starting to feel the dreaded baggage of my last relationship creeping in. I keep putting myself down and thinking it's just a matter of time before he treats me the way my ex did. I know I can't let that prevent future relationships, but it's hard.

I wouldn't call this guy my typical type but he's almost exactly what I need now...he's very positive and motivating and is set on getting me out of this slump i'm in. So far it's been very casual. He dates a lot and has plenty of other females on the scene so I'm not sure what he want's from me, but I'd like to give this a shot. At the very least, it's one new friend I've made. I'm just wondering how one puts aside all that baggage from previous relationships and starts trusting again? A part of me thinks it's not worth it but I also don't want to let past issues prevent me from moving on.

I'm trying to work on being more "open" with people and to "reach out" more but I need help in this area. Frankly, i'm clueless. I'm going to ask some really stupid questions here, so be warned. How often are you supposed to call the guy? Do you call just to say hi? How much is too much at the beginning of a relationship? What the h**l do you talk about?

He told ME to call him sometime. There lies the problem. I'm already assuming that's translation for "i don't like you". Am I wrong? As I said previously, if someone really wants to hang out with you, wouldn't they call you first? Must I really be the one to initiate contact? Tell me it isn't so.

[Mea]

Wow. Why can't he just call you first, seriously. Eh. Him telling you to call him sounds like he's interested IMO.

I dunno, sms him and ask him what's up or something? Or just ask him out for dinner or something. And see how things go from there? It might be worth a try.

O. And how often... Eh.. Maybe ask him out for a date. And see if he asks u out again say 2 weeks later? lol. If he doesn't, ask him out for another date? I dunno.

Talk about anything! Open ended questions that would allow you to know more about him. Like his interests, is he happy with where he is in life, if not, what does he really wanna do, bla bla.

[jessica129]

He actually has been calling me a lot. We just got done talking for an hour and a half on the phone. Just when we were saying goodnight, he asked me to call him sometime. I dunno, I really need some self esteem here. It's ruining things...I always manage to read entirely too much into things that mean nothing. I guess I just have to put myself out there. I just don't know what to talk about after we know everything about each other. He seems very traveled and "world wise" and I'm the complete opposite. We'll see. I should just let things flow.

[Mea]

Then call him! It's a very good sign actually. And he probably needs that kinda reassurance too. I mean, he's been calling you a lot right? Eh, I believe there'll always be something to talk about. Best not to worry too much about that? When relaxed we think better.. no?

Well, since you think he's "world-wise" there's probably a lot he will talk about. Doesn't mean you think you're the opposite you guys can't work out I guess. It sounds good so far. Yea. Letting things flow is a good idea.

[meatburger]

Mea gives good advice. I used to worry about things to talk about a few years back. What a strange worry. It was my worry about it that made me go blank(how ironic). I haven't felt that for a long while now.

Maybe focus on talking in person instead of on the phone? If your in person it gives you plenty of things to talk about. You can even do things that dont require talking, movies, mini golf, bowling. Whatever

You dont even need to talk. Thats how i can tell i get on well with someone. We are relaxed even when its quiet.

[jessica129]

It is such a stupid thing to worry about but I can’t help it. If I could just relax, things would go so much smoother. I’m so focused on what I’m going to say next that I can’t focus on what the other person is actually saying. I’m getting a little better about it but that anxiety is still there. I'm just a bit intimidated by him. He's the complete opposite of me. He's been everywhere and done everything and here I am...still living at home in a small town with hardly any life experience. Opposites are supposed to attract, right? I’m going to just go ahead and give this a chance anyway. He’s been a welcome distraction after such bad times. I guess everyone has these fears to some extent. Dating is meant to be awkward.

[Reuben]

So I was just curious jessie,

How's the relationship going?

If I could just relax, things would go so much smoother. I’m so focused on what I’m going to say next that I can’t focus on what the other person is actually saying. I’m getting a little better about it but that anxiety is still there.

I can identify with this. Anxiety is such a prissy, uninviting emotion, until of course, we collectively realize that in its nakedness, it is pure strength. And if we head out with such a strength in mind, our minds will be open to great possibilities; with a single-minded goal, we will be able to choose the path that best fits our objective. Anxiety is just an emotion that reveals our insecurity in having too many options in mind. Learn from the INTp's, they simply let it loose in their body and calmly pick a choice.

We can do it too. Hope this information was helpful,

and even if it wasn't.

Who cares. :wink:

[jessica129]

That's a good way to look at it.

As for how that relationship is going, I forgot it even existed in the first place, haha.

[mikemex]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

So, imagine you're an ENFp. You find a girl you like. If ENFp acts quickly, things go fine. However, if for some reason the relationship takes time to develop, the ENFp mind starts to forecast scenarios, and more often than not they are inaccurately negative.

So the ENFp, who doesn't want to go through rejection, tries to shield himself from it by asking more active behavior from the ISTp. That's why ENFp do not openly say "I like you, I want to go out with you" but they instead say "I like you, call me". Because by asking such question they really want to be sure that they are liked. No call = no interest.

But, for god sake, ISTp have it easier than any other type. ENFp are so accepting of people that there is nothing to be afraid of. The more you feel insecure about yourself, or better, the more you express it, the more the ENFp wishes to reassure you. ENFp are emotional nurturers...

[Topaz]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

So, imagine you're an ENFp. You find a girl you like. If ENFp acts quickly, things go fine. However, if for some reason the relationship takes time to develop, the ENFp mind starts to forecast scenarios, and more often than not they are inaccurately negative.

So the ENFp, who doesn't want to go through rejection, tries to shield himself from it by asking more active behavior from the ISTp. That's why ENFp do not openly say "I like you, I want to go out with you" but they instead say "I like you, call me". Because by asking such question they really want to be sure that they are liked. No call = no interest.

But, for god sake, ISTp have it easier than any other type. ENFp are so accepting of people that there is nothing to be afraid of. The more you feel insecure about yourself, or better, the more you express it, the more the ENFp wishes to reassure you. ENFp are emotional nurturers...

So true.

[Mea]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

So, imagine you're an ENFp. You find a girl you like. If ENFp acts quickly, things go fine. However, if for some reason the relationship takes time to develop, the ENFp mind starts to forecast scenarios, and more often than not they are inaccurately negative.

So the ENFp, who doesn't want to go through rejection, tries to shield himself from it by asking more active behavior from the ISTp. That's why ENFp do not openly say "I like you, I want to go out with you" but they instead say "I like you, call me". Because by asking such question they really want to be sure that they are liked. No call = no interest.

But, for god sake, ISTp have it easier than any other type. ENFp are so accepting of people that there is nothing to be afraid of. The more you feel insecure about yourself, or better, the more you express it, the more the ENFp wishes to reassure you. ENFp are emotional nurturers...

So true.

Exactly. So much so, that every time an ENFp posts a response to almost any thread, I can't think of anything else to add.

[Expat]

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments.

It's this kind of comment that shows that you are clueless about Socionics.

[Topaz]

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments.

It's this kind of comment that shows that you are clueless about Socionics.

Yeah this was not a fair statement. I was mostly agreeing about the IEE part.

[mikemex]

It's this kind of comment that shows that you are clueless about Socionics.

I'm just as clueless about socionics as you are about people.

[Expat]

I'm just as clueless about socionics as you are about people.

Don't be ridiculous. Rather than just "retaliate", you should look at the kind of nonsense you write on occasion.

This kind of statement:

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments

shows that you know neither Socionics nor people.

[Reuben]

Sorry to say this but I don't think either of us here at delta could be bothered to give a blistering barnacle about whether we knew socionics and people well or not.

Who cares.

Mikemex meant to help and I believe that the help was very well appreciated by all of us here.

Thread closed.

[Expat]

Sorry to say this but I don't think either of us here at delta could be bothered to give a blistering barnacle about whether we knew socionics and people well or not.

Who cares.

Mikemex meant to help and I believe that the help was very well appreciated by all of us here.

Thread closed.

1) "Thread closed" means nothing
2) The point was not mikemex's ignorance of Socionics as such, the point was to challenge his comments on "logical types", if you "appreciate" that then you are as clueless about logical types as he is, especially ISTps, by the way - which are the point of this thread.

[FDG]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

You are clueless about human feelings, a bigot, and idiot, a reservoir of stereotypes, with an inferiority/superiority complex, and probably one of the worst men on hearth.

[FDG]

It's this kind of comment that shows that you are clueless about Socionics.

I'm just as clueless about socionics as you are about people.

IF TWO LOGICAL MEN DISAGREE WITH A STATEMENT OF YOURS ABOUT THE TOTALITY OF LOGICAL MEN THEN YOU ARE WRONG.

[eunice]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

I disagree too. Some logical men may be players, but I notice that they fear rejection more than ethical men whenever they encounter someone they really like. Logical men are often unsure about their feelings and whether the person feel the same way for them. In fact, ethical men have an easier time to date as compared to logical men. Ethical men are more straightforward in showing how they feel. Some logical men are more subtle and they do silly things such as teasing you, acting tough, keeping quiet, behaving cold etc., depending on their type.

[Reuben]

Lol.

Ok it is true that ISTp's have the capability, even to the extent of a tendency, to be sentimentally attached to a person. That is because ISTp's are human. Even more so Fe, the function of adorative worship is usually being suppressed, thus there is a 'hidden agenda' need to love someone.

It is true that ISTp's will form sentimental bonds because of the above reasons, and will find it painful to simply dump a chick they love. I say this from experience myself: I am unable, or at least, prefer not to, dump the ENFp lady I'm with right now. This is because I have invested part of myself in her and losing her will mean losing myself. The same applies to her, therefore we are quite confident in our relationship.

However, I have also, being a bigot, an idiot, a reservoir of stereotypes, with an inferiority AND superiority complex, probably, but I dare not say definitely, the worse man on earth, have dated three ladies at once before, and simultaneously dumped them all without feeling sentimental about it. Not the least bit. However, this is not something I am proud of and in fact I abhor this past action, but since it's past let it be, yet before we move on I must define the perimeters of my defence of mikemex's statements.

It is true that perceiving logical types are able to date women just for the fun of it due to supressed Fe/Fi. However if they are more mature, they will find that creating deep sentiments is something that is worthwhile, and in doing so, will not want to dump a chick.

Thus mikemex is not wrong to say that logical types are able to date women just for the fun of it, but he is only right in the context of a logical type with supressed Fe/Fi who

1) decides to just have fun without having deep sentiments (a decision that a logical type can make much more easily than an ethical type)
2) is not functioning fully; a fully functioning logical perceptive type will realize that creating deep sentiments is something worthwhile (but if not done properly, very painful, and the pain is the exact same reason why a logical perceptive type will prefer to not form too deep a sentiment with someone)

It is also logical that you logical men would want to defend your own ethics against mikemex's generalization. It's understandable, the generalization is too huge, sweeping, and derogatory. But both of you are forgiven, don't worry (go on and bite me)

[Exodus]

I'll say it quickly, because I've said it before.

The more a person likes you, the more afraid are they of rejection. That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

I disagree too. Some logical men may be players, but I notice that they fear rejection more than ethical men whenever they encounter someone they really like. Logical men are often unsure about their feelings and whether the person feel the same way for them. In fact, ethical men have an easier time to date as compared to logical men. Ethical men are more straightforward in showing how they feel. Some logical men are more subtle and they do silly things such as teasing you, acting tough, keeping quiet, behaving cold etc., depending on their type.

I couldn't put it better myself.

[Mea]

I don't think finding it hard or easy to date has anything to do with being ethical or logical. It's ridiculous. Some just find it harder that others.
Ethical men may find it easier because they may find it easier to manipulate the feelings of others.
Whereas, it may be easier for logical men if they do not have any emotional attachment to another person.
Not every logical or ethical person is the same is how they think or feel.
Like how 2 INTjs may disagree with each other, have different opinions, but it does not change the way they derived information.

[mikemex]

You are clueless about human feelings, a bigot, and idiot, a reservoir of stereotypes, with an inferiority/superiority complex, and probably one of the worst men on hearth.

I wonder how you dare you call me a "reservoir of stereotypes" if you yourself support the idea that three letters can describe hundreds of millions of individuals.

You see, there is a principle of reversibility. If you reduce a complex problem into three factors, then you must be able to unfold the problem again from those factors. And, tell me, do we get 400 million of individuals by just unfolding three letters? We don't. And we don't because human behavior is outside the scope of such simplistic view. It's like an sphere: no matter how much you argue about it, the concept of face is foreign to such geometric body.

I come here and play with you about finding the holy grail of sociology, but I honestly do not believe this will last, at least not if things continue as they are. There is a lot of cult-minded people in the forum who invent a theory out of nothing, an ejaculation out of a mental masturbation, and then play the mad scientist routine in which everyone who doesn't agree with their marvelous ideas becomes an enemy.

The problem is that you and most others in this forums are just pseudo-scientists, people who seems to be objective and rational, but that is just the opposite. Socionics is not a matter of act, it's a matter of belief and I challenge you or any other smart ass in the forum to prove otherwise. It's like religion. People sees "miracles", "proofs" of the existence of a deity and they focuses themselves only on what ratifies their already set views.

Real talented thinkers are not great because they have accurate minds, but because they can alternate between distinct ways of thinking. Without such feature you do nothing but to run in circles, like you do.

[flower]

Think of the childeren, wont someone please think of the children

[mikemex]

Think of the childeren, wont someone please think of the children

Hahaha, I remember that episode too.

[Expat]

. And, tell me, do we get 400 million of individuals by just unfolding three letters? We don't. And we don't because human behavior is outside the scope of such simplistic view.

So you must agree that what you just stated above is even more simplistic, since you divide people into two categories, "logicals" and "ethicals":

That's why logical men find it easier to date than ethical men. They just pick up a girl, have fun with her and can drop her at any moment, because they are more interested in simply having fun than in having deep sentiments. And ENFp care deeply.

Unless, of course, you don't believe this either and are just "playing" -- which, of course, means that nothing that you say here about Socionics or Socionics-like theories needs ever to be taken seriously.

How else can what you said be interpreted?

[Reuben]

I really like kittens, they are cute, fuzzy, and fun to play with.

Furthermore, with good grooming, petting and loving from a young and tender age, most kittens will be well-behaved and will respond well to torrential love.

They are also intelligent enough to not participate in futile discussions, arguments, and criticisms.

Either that or they're just plain lazy.

<3 kittens.

[Topaz]

I really like kittens, they are cute, fuzzy, and fun to play with.

Furthermore, with good grooming, petting and loving from a young and tender age, most kittens will be well-behaved and will respond well to torrential love.

They are also intelligent enough to not participate in futile discussions, arguments, and criticisms.

Either that or they're just plain lazy.

<3 kittens.

Is this like a metaphor

[Mea]

I like kittens too blueblade, but i seriously don't get your point...?

[Expat]

I guess the point is to steer the thread and its mood away from the "cantankerous" mood of my own post.

If this is correct, you can see its possible implications.

[flower]

yay @ kittens
We delta love to talk about random stuff to avoid awkward social situations, we dont like the harshness of beta, and have a generally accepting and non-judgemental demenour to our group, wecome, you will be safe here
Have I ever told you about the mystical pink dragonfly that lives in the clouds, well......................... :wink:

[Reuben]

No you haven't, flower.

Tell me!

[FDG]

You are clueless about human feelings, a bigot, and idiot, a reservoir of stereotypes, with an inferiority/superiority complex, and probably one of the worst men on hearth.

I wonder how you dare you call me a "reservoir of stereotypes" if you yourself support the idea that three letters can describe hundreds of millions of individuals.

Too bad I always said it's just a tool. So all your post makes zero sense.

[Reuben]

"I enjoy fighting.

*whacks*

Gawddammit my opponent doesn't hit back.

Screw his passive aggression.

I'm going to sleep, k bye."

No insult to anybody.

[TangoxOfxSin]

I hope this is the correct place to post this, but this is the most recently updated topic so I'm trying here, sorry if I'm wrong!

I'm an ENFp and currently looking at a possible relationship with an ISTp. Before hand, I have have mostly been attracted to those with the iNtuitive preference (I first learned about the MBTI before finding out Socionics which has some things I agree with over the other theory) and I'm really nervous about how to go about possibly dating a sensor, and ironically, I had conifrmed with myself that an ISTp would be one of the very few S I would could imagine myself working things out with (still keep an open mind of course).

So I was hoping to post here to find out what the heck this confused ENFp should do to try and connect. I'm attracted to him and I think he took a big risk by approaching me, which I know is a big step for introverts in general, but the only thing I'm really nervous about is connecting over this S/N difference. For instance he works on cars and does custom jobs on them and I'm completely CLUELESS about cars. Is it a good move for me to try and study up on cars?? They still look like foriegn things to me hobby-wise, but I'm trying to figure out how to create common ground, or if I should at all? I can see why the attraction is there, and we're definately attracted to each other... I might be jumping the gun since the relationship hasn't exactly started yet, but lots of times I feel like I'm talking too much and I just get a "Yeah" to everything I say but he still wants to call me?

I don't mean to hijack the ISTp thread but I didn't see something for ENFps on the first page that concerned relating with ISTps (unless I'm blind or just too excited to post here just finding this board), but I was hoping I could get some insight from ISTps about the S/N difference and how they deal with it, because I think that's my only real issue.

[Joy]

what's up with your screen name?

[TangoxOfxSin]

I just like to say it's up for interpretation

[Joy]

oic

[TangoxOfxSin]

I don't want to come off as boring